Perrone, VictoriaBADM 2050 Sec. 3, W17Ethical framework study Sheila is approached by an individual from a competing company with insiders information. Sheila dilemma what to do with this information will depend on on her choice either to be ethical or take advantage of the information provided to her to benefit her professional career. The author of this paper examines and addresses the issue of one’s, character Sheila and how Sheila’s conscious morality as an individual comes to terms with power, coercion and self control examined by multiple perspective of business ethics. The primary focus of the author is to examine and explore the following frameworks: ethical egoism, utilitarian, virtue prospective, categorical imperative and caring. Analysis of each framework will be applied to the case study and constructing an opinion on which framework is suggested to be superior to others.The Caring framework presented by Carol Gilligan as an independent theorist. She examined and critiqued theories from Kolhberg and Freud’s teaching, (Gilligan. C.,p.1) She identified the previous studies only involved privileged men and boys and did not consider women in these studies which was seen as a bias to women. The Caring theory looks at relationships that are central to women’s perspective, (Gilligan,C, p1). The caring theory is divided into three stages, preconventional, conventional, and post conventional, (Gilligan. C, p.1). Gilligan’s application theory demonstrates at the conventional stage when a job is acquired, an agent wants to make a good impression. At the conventional stage agents are seen to develop meaningful relationships with co-workers. The last stage, post conventional stage caring for oneself is seen to be equal to caring for another colleague. The last stage may not be acquired by the agent, this is dependant on the choice taken by the individual person, (Gilligan.C, p.1). There has been criticism that the caring theory does not have quantitative studies or evidence to support the theories findings, (Gilligan.C, p.1). Applying the theory to the case study Sheila has no meaningful relationship with her competitor and has not acquired any of the stages of the Caring theory in addition to the final stage where oneself cares equally for another colleague may never be acquired because this person is seen as the competitor, (Gilligan.C, p1). Utilitarian framework involves consideration of multiple rules. The golden rule or telling the truth, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes. p.6), are considerations to apply when the outcome is to have the majority of acceptance by the global aggregate when applying the golden rule and taking into account culture and religion the golden rule assumes to treat others as you would want others to treat you. An agent might find themselves concerned with other factors that affect their moral stance when considering options. The agents professional role, legality, and loyalty are some consideration that one maybe facing or dealing with when approaching an ethical dilemma, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes., p.6-7). A top-down approach used by utilitarian address various alternatives to produce the greatest aggregate level to achieve the highest level of satisfaction, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes., p.9). Applying the principle to the case study Sheila action would be to produce the greatest amount of utility through her action and using moral judgement and intuitions that is harmonious with the general principle of the theory (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes., p.10). Applying utilitarian framework to the case study Sheila would execute the greatest good achieving the greatest aggregate level of happiness. Therefore Sheila producing the greatest good and considering her ethical issues we can recognize that the greater good will benefit Sheila directly and her organization at hand. This approach undermines ethical reasoning as we ask is there any wrong doing by accepting insider information. Sheila using this information is illegal and seen morally wrong. Ethical egoism is identifying the agents self-interest and from this interest point for the moral world and gauge what is morally right and wrong, ( Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.37). Application of this framework identifies that the moral judgement taken may not always be in the interest of the individual. Comparisons are used to enable the agents relationship with business and ethics and the relationship with law and ethics supports a position and undertaking of the individuals behaviour, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes., p.38). The “Aquinas position” might be adopted by the agent wondering if someone will find out or if the organization will suffer in accordance to the behaviour of the agent, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.37). Using the framework and considering Sheila’s dilemma doing what is morally correct and not acting on one’s own interest is taken into consideration. The framework supports doing what is right from an individual and global perspective. Virtue ethics considers human qualities such as relationships, emotions sensitivities and motivation from the individual when providing an ethical analysis. These interpretations allow further creative solutions because they take into account the moral being and real moral concerns. (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes., p.19) . According to Aristotle, (Patel.,p.1) The virtuous agent executes moral judgement to define how individuals should behave according to the individual consciousness of moral accountability. Certain desirable traits are viewed imperative when analysing and executing a moral judgement. These traits define the individual agent. Integrity, trust, and fairness, are some of the domain attributes of application to oneself, (Patel.,p.1) This allows moral agents acting morally to all moral concerns. When applying a top-down approach it is suggested that you are viewing moral issues looking in from outside. (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.19).This method creates certain constraints on the agent more so because of the objective rules, duties and constraints to utility (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.19). This approach would be seen as undesirable for a moral agent because of the constraints from the top-down approach and not being able to apply desirable traits, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.20) Furthermore businesses and corporations to be successful must view their philosophy or mission statement as a personal undertaking so that moral agent embraces a code of ethics and it is not seen as an imposition or consequence. (.Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.20) Also this supports behaviour and development seen in organizations. Applying virtue ethics to the case study, allows the moral agent to be moral (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.20). Desirable attribute will allow Shelia to make a conscious deliberation to her action of choice. Categorical imperative science was developed by the most famous deontologist Immanuel Kant. The philosopher believed that humanity has freedom and reasoning which is subjective and an objective measure applied to the individual action measuring their moral choices, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.20). Kant expressed this standard of morality as a maxim and this maxim is a measurement used to judge our moral action to be adopted universally. This maxim was suggest by Kant as a thought experiment generating an action (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.17) The possibility of having a maxim or universal law be justifiable and accepted by moral agents can be seen challenging when applying justification to lie for good reason.(Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.20) The deception to intentionally lie would undermine the categorical imperative universal law and would flaw the moral character. Additional formulaton to the universal law suggests to treat humanity or others as an end and not as a means, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.20) implies to treat each other with dignity and respect and not using people as mere instruments to benefit the individual at hand. This is seen as a meaningful practice in business more so, to treat employees as human beings and not objectifying them. Maximizing profits in an organization should not undermine the moral being. Kant’s Golden Rule, (Cohen.,Grace.,Holmes.,p.20) simply states, treat others as how you would like to be treated as a universal law. Categorical imperative framework supports morality to act meaningful without prejudice and discrimination when applied to the case study the agent would act always to an end and never as a means which Shelia would not accept the insiders information because it would undermine the institutional framework. In conclusion to the theories that were applied to the case study. There is a harmonious underlying seen within all frameworks with exception to the caring theory, which focused on women’s perspective. In addition there is a lack of quantitative studies and findings to support the concept. Egoism, Categorical Imperative, Utilitarian and Virtue ethics examines the moral individual and its attributes. Furthermore examining how one’s moral action affects others individually in the corporate world. It is the author’s strong opinion after analyzing all frameworks to choose the virtue framework as the superior position to accept and apply to the case study. Attributes that are desirable in the workplace and common ground will always be an asset to continue to develop across the lifespan of a moral agent.